Common Free Software/Open Source license names are generally specific or unofficially named. BSD and MIT licenses are named (customarily) from the school or project names. GPL is commonly referred to as such but RMS/GNU always insisted the official name is GNU GPL.
Now, Mr. Rosen prefers to name his licenses in a grandiose fashion. "Academic Free License" and "Open Software License." These give the impression that such licenses are official or superior in some way, as endorsed officially by the OSI. These licenses are better named (for example) "Rosenlaw Academic Free License" and "Rosenlaw Open Software License." The OSI should encourage specific license names unless a license is a product of wide community consent. Just a suggestion. --- "Lawrence E. Rosen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have modified the Academic Free License to remove > the word > "sublicense" from the copyright grant. The new > version, numbered as > version 1.1, is now posted to > www.rosenlaw.com/afl.html. > > It is best for open source licenses not to be > sublicenseable > > I request the OSI board to approve that revised > version. > > /Larry Rosen > > -- > license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3